CCC comments on Rationality Quotes September 2014 - Less Wrong

8 Post author: jaime2000 03 September 2014 09:36PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (379)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: CCC 16 September 2014 09:02:47AM 2 points [-]

This tells me that the order of events is important, and not the actual dates themselves. It is true that, if I want to claim that X caused Y, I need to know that X happened before Y; but it does not make any difference whether they both happened in 1752 or 1923.

Comment author: Lumifer 16 September 2014 03:01:22PM 8 points [-]

Dates are a very convenient way of specifying the temporal order of many different events.

Comment author: Azathoth123 17 September 2014 02:18:34AM 6 points [-]

The time between them also matters. If X happened a year before Y it is more plausible that X caused Y then if X happened a century before Y.

Comment author: Zubon 18 September 2014 10:24:03PM 3 points [-]

Great. I have approximately 6000 years worth of events here, happening across multiple continents, with overlapping events on every scale imaginable from "in this one village" to "world war." If you can keep the relationships between all those things in your memory consistently using no index value, go for it. If not, I might recommend something like a numerical system that puts those 6000 years in order.

I would not recommend putting "0" at a relatively arbitrary point several thousand years after the events in question have started.

Comment author: CCC 26 September 2014 08:49:30AM 1 point [-]

I do agree that an index value is a very useful and intuitive-to-humans way to represent the order of events, especially given the sheer number of events that have taken place through history. However, I do think it's important to note that the index value is only present as a representation of the order of events (and of the distance between them, which, as other commentators have indicated, is also important) and has no intrinsic value in and of itself beyond that.

Comment author: elharo 17 September 2014 12:21:24PM 0 points [-]

It's not just the order but the distance that matters. If you want to say that X caused Y, but X happened a thousand years before Y, chances are that you're at the very least ignoring a lot of additional causes.

In the end, I think, dates are important. It's only the arbitrary positioning of a starting date (e.g. Christian vs. Jewish vs. Chinese calendar) that genuinely doesn't matter; but even that much is useful for us to talk about historical events. I.e. it doesn't really matter where we put year 0, but it matters that we agree to put it somewhere. (Ideally we would have put it somewhat further back in time, maybe nearer the beginning of recorded history, so we didn't have to routinely do BCE/CE conversions in our heads, but that ship has sailed.)